In God We Trust?
While searching the web this evening, I stumbled across Amazon's bestseller list. It turns out that the #2 bestseller is Richard Dawkins's new book, The God Delusion. On the NY Times bestseller list, it is currently the #8 bestseller. For the NY Times book review, go here.
I can't really comment because I haven't read the book yet. Yes, I say yet -- I am planning on reading it. I'm pretty intrigued by the concept of the book and the arguments that Dawkins seems to be putting forth.
And I can't get over the overwhelming amount of reviews and comments that this book has generated on the Amazon site. If you read some of the reviews and their accompanying scathing comments, you get the sense that this is an all-out war. Truthfully, it's sortof scary...but I find it to be mostly sad.
The book's existence reminds me, for the seemingly zillioninth time this week, that both religion and science think they have a lot to say about the other. Consequently, when they clash, they really clash -- and I'm never sure quite what the clashing accomplishes for either of the two.
If you're sick of the clashing between science and religion, I recommend checking out the following books -- if for no other reason than to give you a sense that religion and science don't have to be (shouldn't be?) at odds. Admittedly, I am biased. :)
The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
by Francis Collins
Finding Darwin's God
by Kenneth R. Miller
The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth
by E.O. Wilson (my academic great-grandfather!)
But back to The God Delusion...it will be interesting to see additional reactions that the book generates. And it will be even more interesting to see whether Dawkins -- who labels himself as a 6 out of 7 on the "I'm sure God doesn't exist" scale -- ever changes his mind.
posted by Katie @ 6:42 PM
6 Comments:
I would argue that (Christian) religion and science CAN NOT be at odds. If we believe that God created the world (general revelation) and God inspired the Bible (specific revelation) then if we have a situation where those two seem to contradict then either our interpretation of Creation or of the Bible is wrong.
I think I agree with lindsey. When details contradict, they cannot both be true; the universe cannot be 6,000 years old and billions of years old at the same time. The scientific method provides techniques for resolving such conflicts, and my impression of the books you mentioned are that they take a "God Of The Gaps" approach, in which we define "God" to be anything which we don't know. I personally find that to be a weak basis for religion, and I suspect you would agree.
In other news, I'm wrapping up my tour today and will be returning to the states tomorrow. I have many stories. I will call. :)
Linds -- nicely said.
Brian -- You're right in that I'm not a fan of the "God Of The Gaps" approach. It fosters a distrust of new findings and does a great disservice to God.
However, the books I mentioned don't take the Gap approach. Rather, they assert that scientific knowledge cannot discredit our belief in God (well, two of the three assert that; the third is simply trying to get religious folks to join in the conservation movement). Akin to Lindsey's logic, science seeks to understand the universe that (I believe) God created. Therefore, any "true" finding of science should not be incompatible with belief in God. Sure, it might change our understanding about how He does things, but reading the latest article about evolution doesn't change my beliefs about how God works any more than watching my life unfold does.
Have a safe trip back home!
Brian, Francis Collins' book has a chapter specifically attacking the God of the Gaps approach (Intelligent Design) and explaining why it is both scientifically and theologically bankrupt.
OK, it's good to know that those books don't take that approach. I'm curious, then, about something. If findings based on the scientific method can inform one's knowledge about God, then how is it possible that those findings cannot falsify God's existence? Put another way, if a proposition cannot be falsified, can it really be approached scientifically?
Hi again Brian!
I totall agree that you cannot prove or disprove God's existence using science. What I mean is that as someone who already believes in God and believes that the world was created by God, then the things I learn about the creation can be spiritually edifying for me.
For instance, evolution is such an awesome process, and to me it shows how amazing God is to have nature working in that really cool way. Someone could just as easily look at evolution and say that to them it is an amazing process but they don't believe in God so then it obviously doesn't tell them anything about her. Evolution itself reveals nothing about whether or not there is a God behind it, so what you get out of it depends upon your pre-exisitng beliefs. Does that make sense?
Post a Comment
<< Home